Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

ZAIBUN NISA versus AMJAD HUSSAIN BOKHARI


Article 13 was read in accordance with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Circular evidence showing no exemption or misrepresentation of record by the District Judge in which the High Court refused to order the dismissal of the applicants. , Justification, justification; jurisdiction

1981 S C M R 1065

Present: Karam Elahee, Chauhan and Abdul Kadir Shaikh, JJ

Mst. ZAIBUN NISA AND OTHERS-Petitioners

Versus

Syed AMJAD HUSSAIN BOKHARI AND ANOTHER-Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1076 of 1980, decided on 20th December, 1980.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 13-7-1980, in W. P. 7681 /80).

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) -.

S. 13 read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199-Jurisdic tion-Evidence showing no omission or misreading of record by District Judge ordering eviction of petitioners-High Court's refusal to interfere in such matter, held, justified.--;Jurisdiction.

M. A. Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court itructed by M. A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 20th December, 1980.

ORDER

KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J

.-This is a petition against an order of the High Court dated 13-7-1980, whereby a Constitutional petition being W. P. 7681 /80 filed by the petitioners against the order of the learned District Judge dated 26-2-1980, whereby he accepting the appeal of the respondents/ landlords and holding that the landlords required the property in dispute for their genuine bona fide personal need ordered his eviction. The High Court has taken the view that the findings of fact recorded by the learned District Judge did not suffer from any omission or misreading of evidence and as such could not be interfered with in the course of Constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution. In this respect, the High Court relied upon Muhammad Hussain Munir and others v. Sikandar and others (1). We have been taken through the evidence by the learned counsel but we are not able to find out any omission or misreading of the record and as such refusal of the High Court to interfere in such a matter seems to be quite justified.

2. The petition has no merit and is consequently dismissed. Learned counsel prayed for grant of time to enable his cli-.nt to vacate this property. The request is accepted. We grant two months' time. The petitioner should voluntarily surrender the property to the landlords without damage and should continue to pay the rent in the meantime regularly.

Leave petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
criminal advocate from Panjan Kisan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.